The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

MS pumps out near-ready version of Exchange Server 2010

Microsoft has spun out another test build of Exchange Server 2010. Redmond announced the arrival of Release Candidate 1 of the backend email software yesterday. MS also said in a blog post that more than ten million people were testing the online service version of Exchange Server 2010 across the globe in what it described as “ …

This topic is closed for new posts.
Phil Dalbeck
Paris Hilton

End of the Century?

I'd like to hope it'll be out by the end of decade never mind the end of the century... Unless MS are planning on a Vista style release schedule!

Paris, because she's known to get the goods out fast.

Anonymous Coward
WTF?

2010!

Office 2010, Exchange server 2010, Sharepoint 2010, who gives a shit 2010

If it wasn't for the MTG 2010 decks I'd be beginning to dislike the phrase "2010"

Exchange 2010? WTF happend to Exchange 2007?

Is it just me of does software only stay current for a year and half now? Based on the fact that no-one in their right mind uses latest version of software in a live environment for at least a year.

WTF is happening to Microsoft's product range? It used to be a solid platform, NT Server, NT Workstation, Exchange server 5.5.

Then came 2000 workstation and 2000 server and Exchange 5.5

Now you have XP Pro, home Vista Basic, home basic, vista business, vista ultimate and win 7, home, basic, ultimate and Server 2003 or 2008 and exchange server 2003, 2007 and now 2010 It's fucked up, where is the solid stable and supportable platform?

What the what the fuck! and they wonder why people want to stick with what they've got!?!?!?!?

Anonymous Coward
Stop

@ Anonymous Coward 11:36

While I can agree that there are way too many versions of ms desktop products the server side updates are quite welcome and seem steady at the moment, a new version ick kernel update every 3 years and an intermediate 'feature' rollup in the middle R2.

The server products are supported for 10+ years so you can run them for a good while, we're still hapily running Server 2003 on some server sand will do for a while yet and it's supported until 2013 at least.

If however you want new features then you need to upgrade.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

RE: @Anonymous Coward 11:36

I have to say I disagree. The stable platform is missing and there is no upgrade path on the server products. You effectively have to de-commission a server in order to re-install with the latest "edition" of exchange. In my opinion it doesn't work well and doesn't lend itself to stable reliable systems.

There used to be a set of products that worked together and did the job well, now you have to spend about an hour choosing what version of MSSQL server you need because there are that many versions.

It's a problem.

Brian

RE: @Anonymous Coward 15:07

If you have such a hard time, call the regional MS account manager and ask for help. We've had several resources come in free of charge to help us plan out Exchange 2007 migration.

As for the re-install comment, the only reason you wouldn't have an upgrade path is if you are currently on a 32bit platform. Otherwise, there is an upgrade path. If you want to continue running exchange on a 32bit platform, then you must be at a very small shop.

Lastly, if exchange isn't stable for you then.. well you must be clueless.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

@Brian

It's all very short term business plan, you fail to see the big picture. So the latest Exchange and MS products are not for "small shops" then? When did this happen?

Like I said before, Microsoft's business model used to be to provide a core set of products that all worked well together and were well supported. They don't do that now, it's a mess. I was't making a point that our exchange servers are not stable because they're are stable, but perhaps if you are one of those twats that calls people "resources" then I wouldn't be surprised that you call them clueless because you don't get their point.

Anonymous Coward
Paris Hilton

dated names

its 'cool' to use a name moniker...but it very soon starts to sound/look dated.

more importantly, Google cloud will be here by end of year and that's the way

email is going

PH because exchange is also completely clueless

Trixr
Boffin

@AC - Exchange is not rocket science

I don't see what's difficult about it. You are ready for a hardware refresh, you install a new server, you migrate the mailboxes onto the new server. A bit of fiddling if the old server was the first in the Exchange org, but that takes 1/2 an hour, uninstall, done.

If you're not ready for a hardware refresh, fine. Leave it there for 5 years, no big. I've worked with Exchange over a decade, and I've never ever done an in-place upgrade. Parallel migration is always the way. I really don't understand the "stable" platform thing you keep going on about. Mainstream support lasts 5 years, just as it always has.

As for SQL server, hello, there are three main flavours, as there have always been - enterprise (for clustering/HA), standard and sql express (MSDE). Ok, MS recently invented some stupid little versions to save the cost of driving a website and nothing else, but you just ignore those unless you actually fit that profile.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

RE: Exchange is not rocket science

Fair enough mate, well put. I think we are about to get 25 grand or so to refresh / replace some hardware. I'm sure some of it will end up in the Exchange infrastructure.

Dave Harris

@Brian

"the only reason you wouldn't have an upgrade path is if you are currently on a 32bit platform. "

Well that's not the case: Exchange 2003 64bit to Exchange 2007 64 is a migration, due to architectural changes. it's also true of 2007 to 2010.

I'd imagine, given that we're currently supporting a 2003 32bit environment, that that customer will likely go straight to 2010.

This topic is closed for new posts.